Only 4 senators voted against the latest handout to corporations. I have new-found respect for Marco Rubio, who was the lone Republican senator to vote against amending the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (H.R. 26). 5 Republican house members also had a conscience. The amendment extends the corporate welfare for another 7 years. Phony Small government guy, Rand Paul, joined in on the feeding frenzy as well.
What we should be asking is, “Does a government funded handout in case of acts of terrorism imply the government is liable for inciting such terrorism?” Or is it just the perception that government money grows on trees? The insurance, real estate and financial industries were delighted with the performance of their puppets in congress.
There is an undeniable law in economics. Free stuff begets more of what brings the free stuff. If you like not paying your bills yourself there is always a way to have congress do it for you.
Let’s say the insurance industry had to pay their own way. Terrorism being the threat that it is, the industry in general, would do whatever it can to lessen their risk. Sorta like when we installed our wood stove our insurance company gave us guidelines to follow to help us stay safe (and save them money).
What can the insurance industry do to lessen their risk of terrorism? It could promote politics of non interventionism so as to reduce recruitment of new jihadists (or whatever might poke a stick into any number of other potential hornets’ nests full of lunies). It could require more efficient security at the places they insure, including discounts for having armed employees. But the best thing they could do is is whatever they find works without the aid of the working poor, otherwise known as taxpayers.